Enbridge pipeline

[hobbyguy]

Translation: if science doesn't support your cause, then just say it's a joke.

Actually, real science says that whole concept is backwards. That would be even clearer if Harper and pipeline Joe allowed government scientists to actually provide the public with the information that the public pay for. The fact that they don't is them saying "If science doesn't support your cause, then just say it's a joke."

The real joke is the JRP that Harper and pipeline Joe set up. About as scientifically deep as a kindergarten science experiment. And as far as democratic, balanced, and fair? Well, Putin would be proud...

[maple leaf]

The first leg of a journey to witness the islands and channels deleted by the Enbridge Corporation’s advertising campaign. 
Including comments from a captain of BC ferries as they traverse through the inside passage, in front of Douglas channel;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyuGbRTPHjo

A first hand look at Wright Sound, the epicenter for SuperTanker  Routes proposed  for the Northern Gateway Pipeline.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvLoL-TaleA#t=695

[steven lloyd]

A letter by David Black ...

Refinery is a safer solution
• posted Apr 22, 2014 at 8:00 AM

My name is David Black. I am the majority owner of Black Press, the company that owns this newspaper. This is the first of two columns addressing what I see as the greatest threat to the B.C. environment in our lifetime. I am a reasonably sensible and conservative businessman, not an alarmist. All of the information in this column can be confirmed from public sources.

The oil industry wants to export Alberta bitumen to Asia via tankers. Under no circumstances should we allow that to happen. A bitumen spill at sea could destroy our coastline, together with the fish and wildlife that depend on it, for hundreds of years.

Bitumen, even if it is diluted, does not float in sea water if there is sediment present. This has been proven many times, most recently in a thorough Environment Canada study published on November 30, 2013. Page 51 of the study provides graphic evidence of sunken bitumen. Given that there is an abundance of sediment along the B.C. coast, the bitumen will sink rapidly and there will be little chance of recovering any of it if there is a spill. By Northern Gateway’s own admission, the likelihood of a bitumen spill at sea is over 10 per cent over the next 50 years. Others say that it is much higher. We are in agreement with the position taken by the Coastal First Nations that even the slightest risk of a spill of bitumen at sea is unacceptable.

The grounding of the Exxon Valdez in Alaska in 1989 is often held up as an example of how bad an oil spill at sea can be, however, a spill of bitumen at sea would be much worse. The Exxon Valdez carried light crude and lost 250,000 barrels, one eighth of a tanker load. The light oil floated and could be removed from the beaches. Even so, after four years of work with up to 11,000 workers and 1,400 boats involved, less than 10 per cent of it was recovered. Roughly 200,000 birds and many kinds of other wildlife were killed. Approximately 1,300 miles of shoreline were affected and the fishery has yet to fully recover. Bitumen is very different. It would harden up on shore and much of it would sink to the bottom, making it unrecoverable and killing virtually everything with which it came in contact. Imagine if we lost a full tanker load.

Some say that, with GPS-based navigation and double hulls, spills such as Exxon Valdez are not possible today. They are wrong. Double hulls do not prevent hull fracture if there is a collision at speed, only if there is a gentle scrape. As for the GPS claim, most marine accidents are caused by human inattention, not by a lack of knowledge about position. All ships carried systems to indicate their location before GPS came along. The Exxon Valdez crew could have glanced at their instruments to determine their location but they didn’t, neither did the crew on the Queen of the North. Marine disasters regularly occur and a quick search of the Internet shows human error is most often the problem. Undoubtedly there will be many more marine accidents in the future. Our grandchildren will not thank us if we willingly risk the destruction of the BC coast on our watch.

Fortunately, there is a solution that is beneficial for all concerned: all we have to do is build a refinery at Kitimat. The refinery will convert the bitumen to gasoline, diesel and jet fuel which float and evaporate if they are spilled. Often little or no spill remediation is required. These refined fuels simply do not cause the habitat destruction of conventional or synthetic crude oil, or anywhere near the devastation caused by bitumen.

The second part of this OP-ED will run in the next issue of The NEWS on Thursday, April 24. It will discuss the enormous value-add benefits and environmental advantages of a modern green refinery. The pipeline from Alberta and the tanker fleet to export the refined fuels will also be considered.

Let me declare my biases. I am for creating thousands of good permanent jobs in B.C. I am for creating billions of new tax dollars for government coffers. I am for reducing the planet’s greenhouse gas emissions. I am for building an oil pipeline that will never leak. I am for building a modern tanker fleet that carries only refined fuels that float and evaporate if spilled. I am against shipping bitumen in tankers.

If you agree that we should not put bitumen in tankers, please contact your local MP and say so. The Canadian government makes a decision on this next month.

David Black is the majority owner of Black Press, the company that owns The Parksville Qualicum Beach News.

http://www.bclocalnews.com/opinion/256190571.html

[flamingfingers]

Well, Good on David Black; HOWEVER, he fails to address the issue of a dilbit pipeline traversing rivers, creeks, canyons and wilderness from Alberta to Kitimat and the return pipeline carrying diluent to Alberta from Kitimat. Is he so cockstiff sure that pipeline technology is advanced enough to think that a leak from a pipeline will NOT occur and pollute river systems, communities and be next to impossible to clean up?

I believe the record is clear that pipeline technology (especially under Enbridge) is far from failsafe.

[NAB]

Black now has to acknowledge that transporting DilBit is the problem, whether by ship, railway, or pipeline. His refinery belongs at the source in Alberta, not at Kitimat.

Nab

[Persian Apple Country]

Watching the YouTube video: it deserves to be embedded:


More on http://CoastalTarSands.ca

PS: To be honest I only take offense to the way we are manipulated.

[Persian Apple Country]

And part 2

[steven lloyd]

Black now has to acknowledge that transporting DilBit is the problem, whether by ship, railway, or pipeline. His refinery belongs at the source in Alberta, not at Kitimat.

That does make a good deal of sense Nab, and we can only speculate why the reckless push to extract and export raw product for relatively short term gain at the cost of long term lost opportunity – in addition to possible (likely?) catastrophe. At least Black is looking at and even willing to bet his own effort at exploring and promoting an alternative approach that would be both safer, and in the long run, more profitable and beneficial to Canadians. Maybe some of it a bit far-fetched but I think it is at least worth talking about. There is little to be gained by confusing bravery with recklessness or cowardice with prudence. Here is the second piece he promised would follow his earlier letter:

Refinery would be cutting-edge
• posted Apr 24, 2014 at 9:00 AM

This is the second of two columns addressing what I see as the greatest threat to the B.C. environment in our lifetime.
The Alberta oil industry’s Northern Gateway plan is to export bitumen to Asia via tankers from the B.C. coast. Under no circumstances should we allow that to happen. A bitumen spill at sea could destroy our coastline, together with the fish and wildlife that depend on it, for hundreds of years.

My first column (in Tuesday’s edition of The NEWS)discussed the light oil spill by the Exxon Valdez and the terrible toll it took on the Alaskan habitat and fishery. It also gave proof that a bitumen spill would be far worse. A bitumen spill would be almost completely unrecoverable because it would sink and stay on the bottom of our seabed.

The solution that is best for Canada is to build a refinery in Kitimat. I am promoting and backing this solution. It will convert the bitumen to very light fuels that would float and evaporate if ever spilled. There are other enormous benefits:

• There will be a major reduction in greenhouse gases. We will use new cutting-edge Canadian technology in our refinery. It will be so clean that in combination with oilsands extraction there will be less CO2 than in the huge conventional oilfields and refineries of Iraq and Nigeria. In other words, the Kitimat refinery will neutralize the extra greenhouse gases generated in Canada’s oilsands. This refinery will be built in Asia if not in Kitimat, and if so it will emit double the CO2 of our new design. This is the reason that Andrew Weaver of the B.C. Green Party is in favour of a Canadian refinery.

• An Asian refinery will also generate 100 train cars a day of very dirty coke (much fouler than BC coal) which will be subsequently burnt in the atmosphere to create power. The Kitimat refinery will not result in the production of any coke. As we all live on one planet, it is far better for the global environment to build this refinery in Canada.

• Construction of the refinery will create 6,000 jobs in B.C. for five years. Operations at the refinery will result in more permanent jobs than any project has ever created in B.C. with approximately 3,000 direct jobs. These will be highly-paid, permanent jobs. These jobs will be available for the life of the refinery which should be in excess of 50 years. In addition, there will be thousands of other jobs created in spin-off local petrochemical companies and in indirect employment throughout the province.

• The Canadian and provincial governments, local regional districts and municipalities, and many First Nations, will share in billions of new tax dollars each year.

Unfortunately, our Canadian oil companies are not interested in building a new major refinery. They are focused on extraction, which is more profitable than refining. One of them challenged me to spearhead the refinery myself, so I am doing that. We have a solid business plan and as a consequence, Chinese banks and other institutions are prepared to lend us most of the funds required to build the greenest and most efficient refinery in the world. We are currently moving ahead with engineering design and environmental work.

We will also build a safe pipeline from Alberta to the refinery, with the active participation of First Nations. Modern pipelines can be built and operated safely. Leak data is available for everyone to see on Canadian and U.S. government websites and it proves recently constructed pipelines are not leaking. Furthermore, some of the best pipelining companies in the world are based in Canada.

In addition, we will build a fleet of new tankers, powered by LNG rather than Bunker C oil, to transport the refined products to Asia. This way we know the tankers will be state-of-the-art and as safe as possible. The fleet will be owned by a company based in B.C. so it cannot shirk its legal liability if there ever is a spill at sea.

Let me be up front about my biases. I am for creating thousands of good permanent jobs in B.C. I am for creating billions of new tax dollars for government coffers. I am for reducing the planet’s greenhouse gas emissions. I am for building an oil pipeline that will never leak. I am for building a modern tanker fleet that carries only refined fuels that float and evaporate if spilled. I am against shipping bitumen in tankers.

If you agree that we should not put bitumen in tankers, please contact your local MP and say so. The Canadian government makes a decision on Northern Gateway next month.

— David Black is the majority owner of Black Press, the company that owns The Parksville Qualicum Beach News.
E-mail: [email protected]

http://www.bclocalnews.com/opinion/256546921.html

[maple leaf]

^^ Mr Black 's idea is a step in the right direction ,but still leaves 100's of fish bearing streams and rivers vulnerable to Bitumen spills to which he agrees is impossible to clean up.He says he can build a leak proof pipeline ,but discounts human error ,equipment flaws and failure along with natural possibilities such as land slides.
He needs to take his plan and ideas and move them to Fort Nelson,where the Mayor there is worried about relying only on LNG to support his community. Bitumen should not be shipped through the mountains and rivers over BC under any circumstances .
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/bri ... e18199941/

[DeepEnd]

Oil companies will not build a new refinery in Canada, even for export. Their customers want the whole barrel, not just gasoline or diesel. The number of products made from a barrel of oil is endless.

[NAB]

Oil companies will not build a new refinery in Canada, even for export. Their customers want the whole barrel, not just gasoline or diesel. The number of products made from a barrel of oil is endless.

Once again the real point is missed. It's not about refining oil, it's about transporting DilBit.. And of course turning DilBit into conventional/synthetic oil before it leaves Alberta - either as synthetic oil or further refined into all the other basic products oil is used for.

Nab

[DeepEnd]

Since the product being dug up in Alberta is in Alberta it has to go somewhere other than Canada. Since we are not going to refine it before shipping it will ship as is. Since there is little we can do to stop if those in Ottawa want it to be shipped a pipeline will be built.

I personally think we should be refining here for our consumption. We should have the cheapest gas prices in the western hemisphere. But those that own the oil want the highest price for their unrefined product. And there is no one with the balls in Ottawa to stop it, its up to the Canadian public. And we're worse than those in Ottawa when it comes to standing up for ourselves.

Oh, forgot to add the pipeline will go through the city in which I live part-time. And will be shipped out about half a kilometer from where I work.

[NAB]

I'm not quite understanding what you are suggesting DeepEnd. My understanding is that bitumen is already being upgraded in Alberta then the results further refined in Alberta into finished product( s) as well as elsewhere in Canada (Burnaby for example? Ontario?) and "somewhere other than Canada" (US?).

We already are "refining adequate supplies for our (own) consumption" and have been for years, and exporting surplus (gasoline, diesel, aviation fuels, etc) as well. By the way, we used to have 4 or 5 refineries in BC as I recall, but now only 2. But I'm not sure they have the ability to upgrade raw bitumen into oil before refining it into the finished products anyway.

Selling, transporting, (and exporting) diluted raw bitumen (DilBit) is to me total insanity in the long term, particularly when you consider that the upgraders and refineries (and related jobs) to turn it into finished high value products get exported right along with it!

Nab

[maryjane48]

Since the product being dug up in Alberta is in Alberta it has to go somewhere other than Canada. Since we are not going to refine it before shipping it will ship as is. Since there is little we can do to stop if those in Ottawa want it to be shipped a pipeline will be built.

I personally think we should be refining here for our consumption. We should have the cheapest gas prices in the western hemisphere. But those that own the oil want the highest price for their unrefined product. And there is no one with the balls in Ottawa to stop it, its up to the Canadian public. And we're worse than those in Ottawa when it comes to standing up for ourselves.

Oh, forgot to add the pipeline will go through the city in which I live part-time. And will be shipped out about half a kilometer from where I work.

we the people can stop this next election

[DeepEnd]

I'm not quite understanding what you are suggesting DeepEnd. My understanding is that bitumen is already being upgraded in Alberta then the results further refined in Alberta into finished product( s) as well as elsewhere in Canada (Burnaby for example? Ontario?) and "somewhere other than Canada" (US?).

We already are "refining adequate supplies for our (own) consumption" and have been for years, and exporting surplus (gasoline, diesel, aviation fuels, etc) as well. By the way, we used to have 4 or 5 refineries in BC as I recall, but now only 2. But I'm not sure they have the ability to upgrade raw bitumen into oil before refining it into the finished products anyway.

Selling, transporting, (and exporting) diluted raw bitumen (DilBit) is to me total insanity in the long term, particularly when you consider that the upgraders and refineries (and related jobs) to turn it into finished high value products get exported right along with it!

Nab

As far as I know the bitumen is mixed with a substance to ease the flowabilty for the pipeline. The Us nor the world for that fact wants our gas, they want the oil to refine further. The reason we have less refineries today is based on pricing. A few less refineries equals higher pricing due to less production. We are the USA's largest supplier ( non-OPEC).

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_im ... mbbl_m.htm



Canada 2012 Statistics

Reserves
(2011)


Conventional Oil:
4,118 million barrels
Production: Conventional Oil: 1.31 million barrels per day
Prices: Crude Oil:
WTI @ Cushing on Nymex: 2011 - $95.10 (US$/bbl)
2012 - $94.21 (US$/bbl)
Exports: Crude Oil, Condensates, Pentanes, etc.**: 2011 - 2.218 million barrels per day
2012 - 2.339 million barrels per day
Imports: Crude Oil: 723,000 barrels per day
Canadian Consumption: 1.6 million barrels per day
** includes conventional and non-conventional